Category Archives: Technology

Government and Social Media Webinar

Social Media and Law Enforcement Webinar

This great webinar covers various aspects of what Law Enforcement (and Emergency Management) agencies should be thinking about when it comes to interacting on Social Media.

Emergency Management Magazine hosted a Webinar on February 19th, 2015, sponsored by ArchiveSocial. I got the chance to review this webinar recently and found it incredibly eyeopening as to all the legal issues that could arise when it comes to a government agency having a social media presence. Though the webinar is relatively light on the actual statute and case law specifics lawyers have come to know and love, the three speakers bring up several good policy considerations for Law Enforcement and Emergency Management professionals.

The speakers include Lauri Stevens, Principal Consultant and Founder of LAwS Communications and Anil Chawla, Founder and CEO of ArchiveSocial. The webinar is moderated by Morgan Write, a National Media Technology Analyst and Senior Fellow for the Center for Digital Government.

The entire webinar is just at an hour long and is well worth the view. To register and view a recording of this free webinar, visit Emergency Management Magazine’s website here.

– Will

 

Sen. Schumer asks FCC to change law to allow Amtrak Police and Local Police to communicate

Sen. Schumer asks FCC to change law to allow Amtrak Police and Local Police to communicate

Current FCC regulation treats Amtrak Police as railroad personnel and not as Law Enforcement, making them unable to communicate with local law enforcement personnel via radio in case of emergency.

The history of railway security goes beyond the civil war to the protecting of gold shipments from the West coast to the East coast through the territories. As time progressed, railway corporations became responsible for providing their own security during transit. Today, many state penal codes (including Texas) recognize railway police as a separate and specialized form of law enforcement organization.

U.S. Senator Charles Schumer has asked the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to change a regulation which treats Amtrak Police as railroad personnel rather than law enforcement personnel. Though subtle, this treatment prohibits Amtrak police from having radio communication with local law enforcement and emergency management personnel in the event of an emergency on an Amtrak train passing through the jurisdiction.

The Amtrak Police Department’s over 500 sworn and civilian personnel at 30 locations in 46 states provide security for Amtrak employees, passengers and infrastructure safety and security. The Police Department consists of a: National Communications Center, Patrol Division, and Special Operations Division. The Special Operations Division consists of a K-9 Unit, Intelligence, Special Operations Unit, and Counter-Terrorism Unit.

As we develop our communications annex’s, ensuring the ability to communicate with adjacent agencies in an emergency can be the difference between life and death. Modifying FCC regulations allowing radio communication between Amtrak police and local police and emergency management will help ensure interoperability in the event of an emergency situation. The important thing is that once the FCC modifies existing regulations, is that law enforcement agencies and emergency management organizations amend their communications procedures to include Amtrak Police and the Amtrak Police National Communications Center.

– Will

Read the full article here.

Visit the Amtrak Police Department’s Web Site here.

CEW’s (Tasers) are not allowed on Airplanes

CEW’s (Tasers) are not allowed on Airplanes

Conducted Electrical Weapons (CEW’s) are not allowed to be carried by Law Enforcement on passenger airplanes in the US.

Many of you know that I am a Non-lethal Weapons Instructor for the Army, which includes Conducted Electrical Weapons (CEW’s) among other use of force tools. After receiving this notice from TASER International about this issue, I felt it was important for Emergency Managers to also be aware of the policy issues that might arise during the response planning process.

CEW’s are not allowed to be carried by Law Enforcement on passenger airplanes in the US, even though firearms are. The  IATA Dangerous Goods Regulations for commercial airplanes forbids the carrying of CEWs in both your carryon AND checked luggage on commercial airplanes:  “Electro shock weapons (e.g. Tasers) containing dangerous goods such as explosives, compressed gases, lithium batteries, etc., are forbidden in carry-on baggage or checked baggage or on the person.”  No exception is made for law enforcement officer.  These IATA regulations were adopted by the U.S. Department of Transportation’s PHMSA in 2012.  TASER International, along with the U.S. Department of Interior (DOI) and the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) have all written to the PHMSA requesting that the prohibition against officers’ carrying TASER CEWs aboard airplanes be revised.  Unfortunately, each of these requests has been denied.

If the prohibition against officers carrying CEWs on airplanes affects your agency, TASER International encourages you and your agency to also submit a request for a rule change with PHMSA.  If enough agencies advise PHSMA of the repercussions of the regulation on the law enforcement community then the PHMSA may consider a rule change.

A special thank you goes out to TASER International for continuing to be on the cutting edge of both technology and policy.

– Will

References:

2014 DOJ BATF Ltr to PHMSA

2014-06-13 Dept of Interior ltr to DOT re TASER

2015 PHMSA template

Can states stop military surplus from going to local agencies?

Can states stop military surplus from going to Law Enforcement agencies?

State Lawmakers from several states seek to reduce the flow of military equipment into the hands of law enforcement agencies

Under the 1033 program, surplus Pentagon equipment is available to state and local agencies (including state and local police and others agencies like natural resources departments) free of charge. There’s no federal requirement for state or local approval or oversight of this program.

Now, in the wake of Ferguson, states are considering whether or not this program is fueling the “use of force” issue that was seen there and in several other states. Some are even asking whether the program violates the “Posse Comitatus Act”.

Each state’s bill is slightly different. Some seek for transparency on what is being requested or received by agencies, while others seek to control what types of equipment can be received.

– Will

Read the full article: Here

<script type=’text/javascript’ src=’https://public.tableau.com/javascripts/api/viz_v1.js’></script><div class=’tableauPlaceholder’ style=’width: 649px; height: 569px;’><noscript><a href=’http:&#47;&#47;www.pewtrusts.org&#47;en&#47;research-and-analysis&#47;blogs&#47;stateline&#47;2015&#47;3&#47;24&#47;can-states-slow-the-flow-of-military-equipment-to-police’><img alt=’Dashboard 1 ‘ src=’https:&#47;&#47;public.tableau.com&#47;static&#47;images&#47;10&#47;1033program_1&#47;Dashboard1&#47;1_rss.png’ style=’border: none’ /></a></noscript><object class=’tableauViz’ width=’649′ height=’569′ style=’display:none;’><param name=’host_url’ value=’https%3A%2F%2Fpublic.tableau.com%2F’ /> <param name=’path’ value=’views&#47;1033program_1&#47;Dashboard1′ /> <param name=’toolbar’ value=’yes’ /><param name=’static_image’ value=’https:&#47;&#47;public.tableau.com&#47;static&#47;images&#47;10&#47;1033program_1&#47;Dashboard1&#47;1.png’ /> <param name=’animate_transition’ value=’yes’ /><param name=’display_static_image’ value=’yes’ /><param name=’display_spinner’ value=’yes’ /><param name=’display_overlay’ value=’yes’ /><param name=’display_count’ value=’yes’ /><param name=’showTabs’ value=’y’ /></object></div>

[Pending Legislation] Regulating TASER use by Consumers in Texas

[Pending Legislation] Regulating TASER use by Consumers in Texas

Many of you probably do not realize that there are TASER devices designed for use by private citizens. As a Department of Defense Non-Lethal Weapons instructor I have had the opportunity to learn more about the program, though I have have yet to have the opportunity to fire one.

Currently there is pending legislation in the Texas House of Representatives proposed by Representative Martinez Fischer of San Antonio. The goal of the legislation is to regulate the use of TASERs by non-law enforcement individuals much in the same way that the state regulates the concealed carry program. This has an impact on emergency management because it adds another dynamic of things to think about when conducting sheltering and resource control/distribution during a response scenario.

Consider if you will, you coordinated to have food, water and other necessities dropped off and distributed in the parking lot of your city’s largest retailer, “Big-Mart”. First question is, because it’s private property, who is going to be liable for something that goes wrong? Again, this is why we need legal counsel involved; however, lets go back to the main point. Someone wants more water than what is rationed out. They pull a TASER out and disable the person at the water control station. What do you do? What can you legally do? Do you allow your police to open fire on the individual? Is the city liable for the person having a TASER and inflicting intentional harm on the volunteer/employee at the water station (also known as a battery)? If police open fire on a person that has already expended their one and only shot with a consumer taser device, is it still a threat that needs to be responded with deadly force to?

All these questions and more could be answered by a legal counsel if they were brought in to the planning phase. I know it’s a pain to have a lawyer dump a ton more work on you, but it might be worth it in the end when you can avoid litigation and avoid litigation.

– Will

Read Rep. Martinez’s statement on the proposed legislation here: http://www.house.state.tx.us/news/member/press-releases/?id=1932

Checkout TASER International’s CEW’s for Consumer Self Defense: http://www.taser.com/products/self-defense-products

Taser_Stoper_C-2_img_2864120307042551-vo-rick-sanchez-taser-00000622-story-topf95c7f1d-dd74-42e1-a45c-11f14f224d91-620x372

Is Wearable First Responder Technology a liability time bomb?

Is Wearable First Responder Technology a liability time bomb?

Lets face it, technology is starting to get into every facet of our lives, but is wearable technology for first responders a ticking time bomb of liability?

If the technology stays in the realm of providing information, status reporting or helps bridge language barriers, there might not be as many legal issues arise. However, once we start moving past that into body cameras for EMS or fire fighters, we start recording everyone’s actions (or in-action) during an emergency and any break from protocols would be recorded. This could possibly open up some liability not only for privacy but also possibly under HIPPA.

Granted, we’ll have to wait until June 8th to find out more about the technology that will be developed. I’m certain that whatever new technology ideas are developed, they will help solve some of the problems first responder everywhere face when they launch into the void to save lives.

– Will

Read the full article here: http://www.emergencymgmt.com/safety/Wearable-Technology-Change-Emergency-Response.html

Police+body+camera_West+Midlands